• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Current analysis   cem survey - feb 2012 - final
 

Current analysis cem survey - feb 2012 - final

on

  • 551 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
551
Views on SlideShare
550
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Current analysis   cem survey - feb 2012 - final Current analysis cem survey - feb 2012 - final Presentation Transcript

    • Outsmart Your Competitors Customer Experience Management Survey: Operator Strategies and Purchase Horizons February 2012 Presented by: Jason Marcheck Director, Custom Research jmarcheck@currentanalysis.com Washington DC / London / Paris Follow Current Analysis© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Outline Introduction  Key Findings  Demographics  Analysis  Conclusions Follow Current Analysis 2© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Introduction to the Issue and Survey Design  This research was commissioned by Current Analysis to better understand the key considerations of operators in the implementation of CEM solutions and to help infrastructure vendors achieve differentiation in their portfolios and propositions.  Key issues explored:  Clarify operator interest in CEM solutions across North America and Europe  Discover operator strategies, preferences, and barriers for adopting CEM solutions  Assess the level of importance operators have assigned to the adoption of a CEM solution and establish a level-set of current capabilities  Identify product capabilities suppliers should develop to meet customer requirements and exceed competitor capabilities  Identify operator perception of CEM solution vendors  76 interviews were conducted (online and by telephone) during December 2011 and January 2012  Respondents come from a total of 76 distinct service providers  All respondents involved in operations, network technology or marketing Follow Current Analysis 3© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Outline  Introduction Key Findings  Demographics  Analysis  Conclusions Follow Current Analysis 4© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Key Finding #1: Operational Challenges Key to CEM Implementation Respondents cite “organizational ... At the same time nearly half of all challenges” as the most prominent respondents say that a single barrier to the successful adoption of individual in the operator’s a CEM solution. organization is responsible for CEM oversight. Rank the following barriers to the Is there one person in your company adoption of a CEM solution responsible for overseeing CEM? 1=Low Difficulty, 5=High Difficulty % of respondents, N=76 Mean Response, N=76 Organizational challenges 3.57 Cost to replace existing OSS/BSS systems 3.45 Yes Uncertain ability of CEM system to 3.43 45% gather real-time insights No Difficulty in correlating data from different sources in a timely manner 3.34 55% Multi-vendor solutions create barriers 3.32 to implementation Low priority in relation to other 3.2 upgrades Follow Current Analysis 5© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Key Finding #2: Operators View Customer Care as Priority Operators still consider the resolution of trouble tickets and preventing subscriber churn as the chief objectives of CEM. However, monetization ranked high as a priority, suggesting that while CEM efforts are still focused on “blocking and tackling”, operators do see the value of CEM as a revenue generating tool. What are major objectives of CEM adoption 1=least important; 5=most important Mean Response; N=76 Reduce churn/increase … 4.18 Improve trouble Call response 4.07 Generate new revenue 4.07 Identify highest value customers 4.03 Track network and service performance 3.79 Quickly evaluate effectiveness of new … 3.76 3.72 Bring TDM predictability to IP … 3.71 Track devices using network 3.66 Follow Current Analysis 6© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Key Finding #3: Inconsistencies Related to Personalized Services Though operators place a high priority …they don’t view the tools required on matching up customers with to deliver that personalization as personalized services... primary to CEM. Most important components of CEM Do you Agree or Disagree with following solution? statement? 1=least important, 5=most important 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree mean responses, n=76 means/responses, N=76 Customer care 4.30 Customer relationship management 4.25 CEM is about the quick resolution of Billing/Charging 4.17customer care issues or preventing them 4.21 from happening OSS 4.09 Subscriber Data Management 4.05 CEM is primarily about getting the right customers the right services at the right 4.17 Network Management 3.97 time Policy Control 3.82 CEM is about gaining knowledge on Service Delivery Platform (SDP) 3.79network conditions and taking action to 3.84 Applications Management 3.76 resolve issues Device management 3.74 A major priority of CEM is to identifyyour most valuable customers and cater 3.72 Analytics 3.74 services to support those customers Deep Packet Inspection 3.51 Follow Current Analysis 7 © Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Key Finding #4: Fixed-Only Operators Trail Mobile and Converged In addition to being less … Fixed operators are not as far aggressive than mobile and along as mobile & converged in converged operators in assembling CEM solution. centralizing CEM oversight... Is there one person responsible for Does your organization possess most CEM oversight? of the components of a CEM % of respondents solution? Fixed N=25, Mobile & Converged N=51 % of respondents Fixed N=25, Mobile & Converged N=51 33% 51% 64% 48% No No Yes Yes 67% 49% 52% 36% Fixed Mobile & Converged Fixed Mobile & Converged Follow Current Analysis 8© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Key Finding #5: Operators Plan to Work With Best of Breed Suppliers Nearly half of all respondents have plans to work with multiple vendors to construct a CEM solution that will be run by an in-house team; similarly only 22% indicate that they wish to work with a single integrator to build their CEM solution. Which best describes your CEM adoption strategy? % of respondents, N=76 Work with multiple suppliers and build a CEM 49% system in-house Contract with a single systems integrator to 22% construct a CEM solution Already have one in place 20% Outsource construction and operation of a CEM 9% solution to a third party Follow Current Analysis 9© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Outline  Introduction  Key Findings Demographics  Analysis  Conclusions Follow Current Analysis 10© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Demographics: Operator Type and Region  The survey included respondents from fixed (N=25), mobile (N=5) and Converged (N=41) operators. Converged operators are those with both mobile and fixed assets  Due to the small sampling of mobile-only operators, survey findings related to operator type are often presented in two categories, fixed and mobile & converged, which combines respondents from the mobile and converged categories into a single group Which of the following best describes your Indicate the continent in which your country company? is located % of respondents, N=76 % of respondents, N=76 Fixed operator North America 33% 33% Converged operator Europe 60% 67% Mobile operator 7% Follow Current Analysis 11© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Demographics: Role within Organization  Of the 76 respondents, 23 indentified themselves as CEO or president, 14 identified themselves as being part of the technology organization, 16 as being part of the marketing organization, 22 as being part of the operations organization and one as being in procurement Which best describes your role in the Which best describes your the organization functional area of your job % of respondents, N=76 % of respondents, N=76 1% Network Planning: Procurement 30% 30% 29% Network Planning: Operations Network Planning Corporate Executive: Marketing Corporate Executive Corporate Executive: 70% Technology Corporte Executive: 18% 21% CEO/President Follow Current Analysis 12© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Outline  Introduction  Key Findings  Demographics Analysis  Conclusions Follow Current Analysis 13© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • CEM is Currently Strongly Identified with Network Operations  The selection of Operations by 75% of survey Which business units in your organization respondents indicates that IT portion of the does your CEM strategy involve? operator network the value of CEM is still % of respondents, N=76 viewed widely as an operational tool  Accordingly, the fact that less than half of all Operations 75% respondents consider marketing organizations as part of a CEM solution indicates a hurdle that Billing/Charging 68% vendors need to overcome in conveying a holistic value proposition Customer Care 66%  Strong association between CEM and Network 51% Operations/IT could also explain the inclusion of Billing/Charging and customer care by large majorities of respondents as being part of a CEM Marketing 47% solution Other 8%  Operations/IT bias notwithstanding, approximately half of operators see Marketing as Key Takeaway a key aspect of its CEM strategy As reflected throughout this survey, operators still associate customer satisfaction with service fulfilment, accurate billing and rapid service disruption resolution. The monetization-oriented Mobile & benefits of CEM, which are related to the operator’s network Fixed Converged infrastructure and marketing teams, are not yet obvious to all Operators Operators operators Selected marketing as being an organization involved in operator’s CEM strategy 52% 45% Follow Current Analysis 14© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Operators Still See CEM as Providing Problem Resolution Role  That respondents found customer care issues Do you Agree or Disagree with following to be the most important outcome of the statement? adoption of a CEM solution is consistent with 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree the general findings of the survey means/responses, N=76  Respondents also strongly agreed with the statement that CEM was about matching up CEM is about the quick resolution of subscribers with the proper services at the customer care issues or preventing them 4.21 proper time. While other portions of the from happening survey don’t support the view that CEM is primarily about getting the right monetization as a high priority, the concept of customers the right services at the right 4.17 time CEM as matching services to customers appears to be taking hold CEM is about gaining knowledge on network conditions and taking action to resolve issues 3.84  CEM, relative to other functions, surprisingly was not viewed as having value as an A major priority of CEM is to identify your most valuable customers and cater identifier of high-value customers 3.72 services to support those customers Key Takeaway Respondents envision CEM as primarily a means to help subscribers resolve or avoid service performance issues. Operators see CEM as largely being a vehicle for making sure subscriber problems are resolved rapidly or prevented. It also seems true that while operators see the role that CEM can play in services delivery strategies, CEM suppliers will need to convince operators of the full value CEM can provide with respect to targeting subscribers with attractive service options and personalization. Follow Current Analysis 15© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Constructing a CEM Solution is Not the Top Priority of Operators Interest in the following major projects?  Construction of a comprehensive CEM solution finished fourth, in terms of top priorities for 1=very low, 5=very high operators, beneath reducing OpEx, optimizing OSS mean response, N=76 and an all-IP transformation Reducing OpEx 4.08  Even though it finished fourth in this particular popularity test, constructing a CEM solution still finds plenty of support, with a mean score of 3.7 Optimizing OSS 3.99  CEM as part of a new technology introduction received least interest despite association with high All-IP Transformation 3.88 priority technology roll-outs like IMS and LTE  European operators consider CEM more of a Comprehensive CEM Solution 3.70 priority than North American operators – see belowNew technology/architecture adoption 3.61 Key Takeaway North CEM solution providers need to promote the adoption of America Europe a CEM solution as being logically concurrent with other Mean score (1-5) when major operator agendas, such as OSS optimization. In asked about importance addition, CEM solution providers should stress the OpEx of constructing CEM benefits of CEM. solution 3.32 3.88 Follow Current Analysis 16© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Churn Reduction Viewed as Major Objective of CEM Solutions What are the major objectives of CEM adoption  Given that retaining customers is fundamental to 1=least important; 5=most important operator survival, churn reduction is seen as the Mean Response; N=76 chief objective of CEM solution adoption Reduce churn/increase loyalty 4.18  Though “generate new revenue” scores high as a major CEM solution objective, other findings – such Improve trouble Call response 4.07 as identifying high value customers, using CEM as a marketing engine, etc. – that score low indicate Generate new revenue 4.07 that operators recognize the need to generate more revenue, they are still struggling to fully grasp the Identify highest value customers 4.03 particulars of the role that CEM can play in enabling increased revenue generation Track network and service performance 3.79 Quickly evaluate effectiveness of new  Given that operators in 2012 will intensify their 3.76 offerings struggle with OTTs for supremacy asDifferentiate services from competitors/OTT 3.72 communications service providers, the fact that differentiation from OTT players ranked somewhat Bring TDM predictability to IP network 3.71 low in terms of CEM solution objectives indicates a lack of operator focus on the OTT threat Track devices using network 3.66 Key Takeaway The fact that operators recognize the importance of CEM as a driver of new services is encouraging. However, it appears that they lack the understanding of the manner in which CEM can be utilized to increase revenue. This presents a clear challenge and opportunity for vendors to do a better job of articulating the comprehensive value that holistic CEM solutions can bring to the table. Follow Current Analysis 17© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Fixed and Converged Operators Have Different CEM Objectives  Although the differences in the CEM objectives of fixed and converged operators were relatively small, the two groups had significantly different views of the importance of identifying high-value customers. What are major objectives of CEM adoption? 1=least important; 5=most important Mean response; Fixed: N=25, Converged N=51 4.52 4.12 4.22 4.08 4.06 4.20 4.00 3.96 4.04 3.78 3.76 3.76 3.64 3.76 3.64 3.67 3.44 3.55 Fixed Converged Key Takeaway Up sell opportunities for services consumed via fixed networks (i.e., higher downlink speeds, premium TV content, etc.) tend to be more subscription oriented than mobile services (i.e. Music downloads, ringtones, etc.). Vendors need to emphasize the value of CEM as a tool for managing transactions to help mobile operators see monetization benefits of CEM solutions Follow Current Analysis 18© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Organizational Challenges Seen as Biggest Adoption Obstacle  Respondents consider overcoming organizational Rank the following barriers to the adoption issues as being the most difficult CEM adoption of a CEM solution barrier to hurdle 1=Low Difficulty, 5=High Difficulty Mean Response, N=76  The fact that the top three barriers seemingly address three different challenges – organizational issues, cost issues, and technology issues – Organizational challenges 3.57 indicates that there is no “silver bullet” for vendors to use that will demonstrate the value proposition for a comprehensive CEM solution Cost to replace existing OSS/BSS systems 3.45  The survey’s findings that respondents do not Uncertain ability of CEM system to gather real-time insights 3.43 consider the “Difficultly of correlating data” to be a major barrier may be the result of respondents Difficulty in correlating data from indicating elsewhere in the survey that they don’t 3.34 different sources in a timely manner consider this operation to be a major component of CEM Multi-vendor solutions create barriers to 3.32 implementation  European carriers see organization issues as a bigger barrier to adoption than North American Low priority in relation to other upgrades 3.2 operators – see below. Key Takeaway Not surprisingly, operators see organizational issues as North having the biggest impact on CEM solution adoption. America Europe Broadly, operators tend to see CEM as related to IT and Mean score (1-5) when operations and see difficulties in extrapolating it across asked if organizational issues represented a other businesses in the organization. major barrier to adoption 3.24 3.73 Follow Current Analysis 19© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Service-Layer Attributes are Surprisingly Ranked Low in Priority  Consistent with the strong association of CEM with Most Important Components of CEM operational components of the organization, Solution? operators consider customer care and CRM, two 1=least important, 5=most important traditional IT stalwarts, to be the most important mean responses, n=76 pieces of a CEM solution Customer care 4.30  Oddly, the CEM components that primarily provide operators with information about users, their devices Customer relationship management 4.25 and the services they are access on the network, rank Billing/Charging 4.17 the lowest in terms of importance to a CEM solution OSS 4.09  With a substantial spread between N. American and Subscriber Data Management 4.05 Europe opinions on and analytics and DPI (see Network Management 3.97 below), operators in N. America appear to be dismissing two rich sources of information about Policy Control 3.82 network activity and subscriber preferences Service Delivery Platform (SDP) 3.79 Applications Management 3.76 North America Europe Device management 3.74 DPI 3.00 3.76 Analytics 3.74 Analytics 3.28 3.96 Deep Packet Inspection 3.51 Key Takeaway If the seizing of monetization opportunities defines the second evolutional wave of CEM solutions, operators have yet to embrace that aspect of a CEM solution. Components that are most responsible for providing personalized and targeted services, such as policy control, analytics and DPI equipment, are ranked low by operators. Vendors need to seize the opportunity to educate their customers on these points. Follow Current Analysis 20© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Churn Prevention is Key Measurement of CEM Effectiveness  Strangely, operators put a low priority on application Rate the most important KPIs related to and service performance, which appears to contradict the priority placed on churn prevention. CEM Operators apparently see customer satisfaction more Mean of responses, 1=very low, 5=very high as a measure of network performance that the quality of the subscriber experience. Customer retention 4.47  No surprise that most operators believe the most important evidence of a CEM solution’s effectiveness is the retention of customers. Reduction of trouble calls 4.21  The low ranking of the ability to gauge the effectiveness of a new campaign reinforces findings suggesting a low awareness for the monetization- Ability to access the network 4.13 aspects of CEM among operators.  Importance of campaigns and service performance Effectiveness of new campaigns 3.96 differ by job position – see below. Service Activation 3.96 CEO Technology Marketing Operations Effectiveness of new campaigns (mean) 4.13 4.0 4.38 3.5 Application/service performance 3.89 Application/service performance (mean) 4.0 4.21 3.81 3.68 Key Takeaway CEM solution vendors still need to educate operators on the importance of ensuring that subscribers have a quality experience with the services and applications that run over their network. Similarly, vendors need to help operators understand that service performance play into churn; customers will be less likely to churn if the network is up and running and all problems are resolved in a timely manner. Follow Current Analysis 21© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Device Data Ranks Near Bottom as Source of Customer Insight  Operators oddly selected billing related Rate the following sources of customer information as being the most important source insight in terms of a CEM solution of customer insight mean of responses, 1=least important, 5=most important, N=76  Device information is also oddly at the bottom of the ranking, especially given the impact that the Customer Care Data - Billing Related flourishing of smart phones and tablets have had 4.22 on network performance. Subscriber data 4.17  With the exception of contextual data, nearly all Customer Care Data - Tech Support… 4.16 other sources of customer insight are ranked Network performance data 4.08 similarly, an indication that operators have yet to form conclusive opinions on the relative Service data 4.07 importance of various information types Payment data 4.07  The appearance of contextual data at the bottom Service ordering and activation data 4.05 of the list is indicative of the disassociation that Device data 3.84 operators apparently hold between CEM and opportunities to seize on revenue-generation Contextual data (location, etc.) 3.49 events. Key Takeaway The generally high ranking of all sources of information support the notion that operators are looking for a comprehensive view of the subscriber experience. This demonstrates an opportunity for CEM solutions vendors to educate operators the value of pre-rollout consulting engagements to demonstrate the relevance of each information source. In doing so, vendors have an opportunity to differentiate their consulting offers. Follow Current Analysis 22© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Operators Value Automation and Timeliness over Holistic Attributes Most important attributes of a CEM solution?  Of eight characteristics of a CEM Mean of responses, 1=least important, 5=most solution, operators, by a significant important, N=76 amount, felt “automation” to be the most important. Automated 4.26  Interest in Proactive resolution Proactive 4.18 indicates an opportunity for vendors to demonstrate the value that Analytics Timely (i.e., real-time data) 4.09 can bring to a CEM solution Cross organizational 4.04  With “seamless” and “holistic” falling at Interactive 3.96 the bottom of the importance ranking, operators apparently understand the Predictive 3.95 value of acting on customer data, but Seamless (i.e., enabling correlation of 3.93 not in viewing that data in a holistic data) manner. Holistic 3.86 Key Takeaway Operators seem to have yet to fully buy into the value of some the most recent advances in CEM, which are tied to harnessing the power of information about the user experience. However interest in attributes such as Proactive data indicates that vendors have the opportunity to educate operators on the tangible value to key aspects such as Analytics capabilities. Follow Current Analysis 23© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Operators Feel They Possess Most Components of CEM Solution Does your organization possess most Which CEM components do you need to of the components of a CEM purchase or update? solution? % of respondents, N=76 % of respondents CRM 58% N=76 Customer care 43% Billing/Charging 36% 38% OSS 33% Network Management 33% Analytics 32% No SDP 29% Yes Applications Management 28% 62% Device management 26% SDM 26% Deep Packet Inspection 25% Policy Control 20% Key Takeaway Presently, most operators hold the view that CEM needs to plug back into the CRM function. The low scores for DPI and policy control are likely to be more indicative of the fact that operators don’t see these elements as being important components of CRM. In turn, vendors need to take the opportunity to articulate the business value of DPI, policy control, etc. Follow Current Analysis 24© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Operators View a Mix of Factors as Key CEM Cost Drivers Product costs are the biggest expense  Overall, operators expect that the cost of the adopting of a CEM solution will be mix of associated with adoption of a CEM solution product, operations and services costs % of respondents, Overall: N=76, Fixed: N=25, Converged: N=51  Per the chart below – and as expected – it seems clear that technology execs are much more focused on product costs than their marketing and operations counterparts  Survey’s lack of procurement respondents limits 51% 47% real insight into this issue 60% FALSE TRUE 49% 53% 40% Technology Marketing Operations Products represent the biggest CEM solution Overall Fixed Converged adoption experience. 86% 31% 32% Key Takeaway The even split in expectations between services and product expenses indicates that operators potentially view both aspects of CEM adoption daunting. If so, then the CEM vendor mandate is to demonstrate how adopting comprehensive CEM solutions product cost synergies that might not be so easily realized via piecemeal introductions of CEM components over time. Follow Current Analysis 25© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Operators, Especially N. AM, View CEM Solution as In-House Project  Nearly half of all respondents say they plan to construct a multivendor CEM solution, managing Which scenario best describes your CEM the project internally. This is consistent with adoption strategy? views expressed elsewhere in the survey % of respondents, N=76 indicating that operators in general believe they already posses most of the components for a CEM solution. Work with multiple suppliers and build a 49% CEM system in-house  The 22 percent of respondents that plan to work with a single systems integrator represent a sizeable opportunity for CEM solution providers Contract with a single systems integrator 22% that are capable of overseeing a multi-vendor to construct a CEM solution project. Already have one in place 20% North America Europe In-house construction 72% 37% Outsource construction and operation of 9% Single system integrator 20% 24% a CEM solution to a third party Already have CEM 8% 25% Outsource to 3rd party 0% 14% Key Takeaway These finding indicate that while many of the largest vendors are pitching the value of “end-to-end” CEM capabilities, the reality is that half of operators will be looking to use multiple partners. For smaller vendors, this means ensuring to articulate the interoperability of their solutions. For larger vendors, articulating their SI capabilities will be key to demonstrating the value they can serve in a prime integrator role. Follow Current Analysis 26© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • CEM Adoption Will be Spread Out Over the Next Few Years  44% of respondents project adoption of a CEM solution in 2012 or 2013 Timing of adoption of CEM solution? % of respondents, Overall: N=61, Fixed: N=22,  A majority of respondents either don’t know when Converged: N=39 they will adopt a CEM solution or believe adoption is at least three years away 11%  Fixed operators are more aggressive timing wise in the adoption of a CEM solution 26%  All respondents interviewed for this survey indicated that they have plans to adopt a CEM solution. This Year Therefore, respondents who answered “don’t know” Next Year are deliberating over timing, and not whether to 33% adopt a CEM solution. 3+ Years Don’t Know 30% North America Europe This year/Next year 39% 48% 3+ years/Don’t know 61% 52% Key Takeaway CEM represents both a near term (i.e. 44% of operators expect to invest this year or next year), and a longer term opportunity. As such, vendors need to be sure to speak to near term needs in places that will be investing this year (i.e. Europe), and continuing to educate operators in markets (i.e. N. AM) where operator plans are less concrete. Follow Current Analysis 27© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • HP and IBM clear favorites as CEM solution providers Perception of following vendors as CEM solution providers? 1=very negative, 5=very positive, mean of respondents, N=76 HP 3.87 IBM 3.70 Nokia Siemens Networks 3.53 Ericsson 3.38 Alcatel-Lucent 3.22 Huawei 3.04 Openet 2.89 ZTE 2.72  Vendor roster is made up of Tekelec 2.62 equipment and software providers that claim to offer a CEM solution Netcracker 2.57 Amdocs 2.49 Key Takeaway Participants in this survey clearly see companies with the best known system integration expertise as the primary suppliers of CEM solutions. However, Network equipment makers that have demonstrated their own SI capabilities follow fairly closely. Smaller players, best known for products rather than broad SI skills, such as NEC/Netcracker and Amdocs, fall at the bottom of the ranking. Follow Current Analysis 28© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • NSN’s very positive ranking puts it in class with IBM and HP Which vendors do you hold a very positive  In the survey, operators were asked to rank vendors on a scale of 1-5, with 5 equalling a very perspective as CEM solution providers? positive opinion of the vendor. % of respondents, N=76  When only very positive responses are HP 26% considered, NSN attracted the highest Nokia Siemens Networks 26% percentage of responders, tying it with HP for leadership. IBM 25% Ericsson 14%  Zero respondents said they had a very negative perception of HP, while only one respondent gave Alcatel-Lucent 9% IBM a very negative perception rating. Huawei 7%  When viewed from a regional standpoint, vendor Openet 5% perception varied very little between North ZTE 5% American and European operators. Netcracker 3% Tekelec 3% Amdocs 1% Key Takeaway NSN currently enjoys some perception advantages over its immediate rivals in the burgeoning CEM solution market. NSN’s early championing of CEM, as early as a year ahead of rivals, is likely responsible for the company’s positive recognition among operators. This point is reinforced when viewing the substantial difference between NSN and Ericsson. As such, Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent and Huawei should view NSN’s overt focus on CEM as a substantial threat. Follow Current Analysis 29© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Outline  Introduction  Key Findings  Demographics  Analysis Conclusions Follow Current Analysis 30© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Conclusions – Overall Theme  Network operators, by and large, still exhibit some confusion with respect to crafting their CEM adoption strategies  Many operators see organization issues as the primary obstacle to CEM adoption • This, despite the fact that more than half of the organizations surveyed indicated that they have a single person in charge of CEM strategy  Many operators feel that proactive identification of issues is an important role in CEM, but that a holistic CEM system is less of a priority • This, despite the fact that a holistic, cross-organizational CEM system would better enable proactive identification of all issues that could impact customer experience  Many operators cite “getting the right services to the right customers” as key priority, yet they value service-layer tools – such as DPI, device management, etc. – low relative to other CEM attributes  Taken as a whole, CEM vendors are being challenged to better educate operators about how effectively implemented CEM solutions can mitigate some of these conflicts Follow Current Analysis 31© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Conclusions – Major Findings  Operators still heavily associate CEM with operations & care  Vendor positioning of CEM is that of clearly entering a phase in its development that extends customer satisfaction beyond traditional measurements, such as adequate service quality, network availability and the quick resolution of deterioration of either quality or availability.  Vendors now claim CEM is now equally concerned with more anticipatory issues, such as supplying the subscriber with customized service plans or personalized offerings based on context, such as the device he/she is currently using or the location of the subscriber.  This latest phase in the evolution of CEM, which can be accurately described as assisting operators in further monetizing their networks and differentiating their offerings from OTT provides, is clearly not fully conceptualized by a large percentage of the respondents of this survey.  Operators need to be shown that correlation of customer insight is a crucial component of an effective CEM solution  Survey findings that rank “holistic” and “information correlation” as the least important attributes of a CEM solution indicate that operators have yet to seize on the importance of fully leveraging the information about subscribers that is readily accessible on their networks.  Perhaps owing to an operations bias cited above, respondents in this survey see limited value in acquiring and analysing user-oriented information, such as device information or application usage.  For CEM to develop into an operator discipline that represents a significant revenue opportunity for CEM solution suppliers, operators will need to be better educated on how to harness and utilize this vital information. Follow Current Analysis 32© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Conclusions – CEM Preferences & Deployment Drivers  Operators are aware of and addressing organizational challenges associated with CEM adoption  Survey respondents cited organization issues as big obstacle to adoption  Nearly half of operators surveyed report that CEM oversight has been assigned to an individual  Operational issues, such as customer care, are widely viewed as a chief objective of a CEM solution  Marketing –related benefits, such as the evaluation of new campaigns, did not rate high  Operators surveyed identified service personalization as an important CEM objective but failed to place a high value on components that are normally associated with enabling operators to deliver personalized services  Policy control, DPI and analytics fell at the bottom of a ranking of the most important CEM solution components  Mobile and converged operators have been more aggressive in adoption of CEM solutions than fixed-only counterparts  Only 36% of fixed have placed CEM oversight with a single entity, compared to 51% for converged  About half of fixed operators believe they have the pieces of a CEM solution, compared to 67% converged  Operators overwhelmingly plan to oversee the construction of a CEM solution through the selection of products and services from multiple suppliers Follow Current Analysis 33© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Conclusions – CEM Preferences & Deployment Drivers  Construction of a comprehensive CEM solution finished fourth, in terms of the priority place on major operator initiatives  Finished behind reducing OpEx, optimizing OSS and all-IP transformation  Operators do not currently view network infrastructure or marketing organizations as being critical components of a CEM strategy  Operations, billing/charging and customer care get top ranking  Less than half of all respondents indentified marketing as strategic to CEM  Respondents envision CEM as primarily a means to help subscribers resolve or avoid service performance issues  Large majority agree with statement that CEM is primarily about problem prevention or resolution  Operators consider customer care and CRM, two traditional IT stalwarts, to be the most important pieces of a CEM solution  Analytics and deep packet inspection fined at the bottom of the importance ranking  Device data ranks near bottom as source of customer insight  Customer care information and subscriber data were viewed as most important  Operators value automation and timeliness over holistic attributes  Operators view CEM solutions as equal mix of products and services Follow Current Analysis 34© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Conclusions – Timing and Vendor Perception  A majority of respondents either don’t know when they will adopt a CEM solution or believe adoption is at least three years away  44% of respondents project adoption of a CEM solution in 2012 or 2013  Fixed operators are surprising more aggressive timing wise in the adoption of a CEM solution  Participants in this survey clearly see companies with deep system integration expertise as the primary suppliers of CEM solutions  HP and IBM score highest perception rating among potential CEM solution providers  IT specialists, Amdocs and Netcracker, are at bottom of perception rating  NSN currently enjoys some perception advantages over its immediate rivals in the burgeoning CEM solution market  Finished second behind HP in the percentage of respondents that gave it the highest perception score  Of the 76 respondents surveyed, nearly half mentioned HP as an equipment vendor he/she would consider in the purchase of some or part of a CEM solution  That percentage increases to 65% when only the answers of CEOs completing the survey are considered Follow Current Analysis 35© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.
    • Thank you Name: Jason Marcheck Title: Director, Custom Research Email: jmarcheck@currentanalysis.com Website: www.currentanalysis.com Follow Current Analysis 36© Current Analysis Inc. All rights reserved.